[ How states are stepping up to protect workers’ rights and
freedoms]
[[link removed]]

TACKLING THE PROBLEM OF ‘CAPTIVE AUDIENCE’ MEETINGS  
[[link removed]]


 

Daniel Perez and Jennifer Sherer
October 24, 2023
Economic Policy Institute
[[link removed]]


*
[[link removed]]
*
[[link removed]]
*
*
[[link removed]]

_ How states are stepping up to protect workers’ rights and
freedoms _

, The Valley Labor Report

 

Political and religious coercion in the workplace is a growing problem
affecting workers from all backgrounds and across the political
spectrum. U.S. employers have tremendous power over worker conduct
under current federal laws. For example, employers can require workers
to attend “captive audience” meetings—and force employees to
listen to political, religious, or anti-union employer views—_on
work time_.

In the face of this growing threat, legislators in 18 states have
advanced bills to protect workers from offensive or unwanted political
and religious speech unrelated to job tasks or performance. These
bills are designed to prohibit employers from threatening,
disciplining, firing, or retaliating against workers who refuse to
attend mandatory workplace meetings focused on communicating opinions
on political or religious matters.

Importantly, these state laws do not limit employers’ rights to
express their beliefs freely or even to continue inviting employees to
attend workplace political or religious meetings. These laws simply
empower workers to opt out of unwelcome political speech by protecting
them from financial harm or retaliation if they choose not to attend
such meetings.

A growing number of states are taking action to protect workers’
freedom of thought and association

So far, six states have enacted laws designed to protect employees’
dignity and freedom of thought and association. TABLE 1 summarizes
these laws, additional bills currently under consideration, as well as
bills that have been previously proposed.

Because most workers (in the absence of a collective bargaining
agreement) are considered “at-will” employees who can be
terminated at any time, employers often try to exercise vast authority
over employees’ lives, including their political activities or
freedom of association.

This power is routinely abused to coerce workers into attending
political rallies
[[link removed]],
religious discussions
[[link removed]],
or anti-union meetings
[[link removed]]
under the threat of disciplinary action. State legislators, however,
are working to fill the void left by continued congressional inaction.
State legislation that creates a minimum labor standard to protect
workers from abusive forms of employer coercion can help workers more
fully exercise their basic rights.

Current labor and employment laws allow bosses to bombard workers with
politics and religion

Employers are increasingly using the workplace to advance their
political interests, and the lack of legal protections for workers has
created a situation ripe for coercion. Traditionally, employers have
relied on donations, lobbying, and political action committees to
advance their political interests. However, nearly universal
“at-will” employment laws
[[link removed]]
and recent legal rulings are emboldening employers to politically
mobilize
[[link removed]]
their own employees.

Pervasive “at-will” employment laws
[[link removed]]
give employers the right to terminate workers without cause or for
virtually any reason—_including their political beliefs_. And the
2010 landmark Supreme Court decision in Citizens United v. Federal
Election Commission
[[link removed]]
extended First Amendment protections to corporate political spending
and gave employers the green light to hold political captive audience
meetings
[[link removed]].
In tandem, these laws have had dire implications for workers and the
democratic process.

A 2015 study
[[link removed]]
revealed how widespread political communication is in U.S. workplaces.
One in four U.S. workers has been contacted by their employer
regarding a political matter. Of these workers, 20% (representing 5%
of all U.S. workers) received messages from their boss that included
one or more threats of job loss, business closure, or changes to wages
and hours. Under current federal labor and employment laws, it is
perfectly legal for an employer to threaten, discipline, or terminate
an employee for objecting to their boss’s political views.

Political coercion affects U.S. workers of all backgrounds and across
the political spectrum. Consider the following examples in which
workers were pressured to vote in specific ways or forced to donate to
political campaigns or lobby other voters to support legislation.

* In 2014 at a ConocoPhillips’ site in Alaska, some 200
construction workers were called into a “safety stand-down”
meeting—typically held after serious workplace incidents. Rather
than addressing a safety concern, a ConocoPhillips’ representative
discussed the company’s stance on the upcoming August primaries
[[link removed]],
emphasizing its opposition to a ballot measure to repeal a significant
tax cut for oil companies. The message to the workers was that their
jobs relied on tax breaks, and voting against the repeal could harm
their industry and livelihoods. One worker described the meeting as an
abuse of safety protocol, while others reported fearing for their
jobs.
* During the 2012 election, presidential candidate Mitt Romney spoke
at an Ohio coal mine at the invitation of Murray Energy’s CEO,
Robert Murray. Workers later said that mine operations were halted,
and they were forced to attend the event without pay
[[link removed]].
Managerial staff also reported being pressured to donate to Murray
Energy’s political action committee. Internal records later revealed
that employee donations were monitored and that employees who failed
to donate generously enough faced potential demotions and missed
bonuses.
* In 2018, D.C. voters introduced Ballot Initiative 77 that would
have raised the tipped wage from $3.33 to the regular minimum wage
($12.50 an hour at the time). Restaurant industry representatives
embarked on a vigorous campaign opposing the initiative
[[link removed]]
called “Save Our Tips,” warning of widespread restaurant closures
and job losses. Around the city, restaurants displayed “Save Our
Tips” and “NO on 77” signs. Some employers distributed weekly
newsletters to employees featuring anti-Initiative 77 content and
provided workers with instructions on how to vote on the initiative.
Other employers held captive audience meetings during work hours to
tell workers that Initiative 77 would harm them
[[link removed]].
Additionally, workers were encouraged to inform customers about the
perceived negative impacts of the initiative.

While Title VII of the Civil Rights Act explicitly prohibits religious
discrimination by employers, religious coercion is rampant in U.S.
workplaces. For example:

* In an infamous Oregon case
[[link removed]],
a formerly incarcerated worker of Native American descent attended
weekly, hour-long Bible study sessions out of fear “that he
wouldn’t be able to find other work” if he declined. Following six
months of weekly attendance, the worker declined to attend further
sessions and was subsequently fired.
* A North Carolina-based home renovation company required employees
to attend daily worship
[[link removed]]
sessions that included prayer and Bible reading. A lawsuit alleged
that the company owner would track attendance and reprimand employees
who were absent. Additionally, when a manager asked to be excused from
prayer, the owner subsequently cut his pay and then fired him.
* Employees at a Long Island, New York, firm alleged they were
compelled to pray, chant, and partake in spiritual interpersonal
workshops
[[link removed]]
as part of a program called “Onionhead.” Workers described the
workplace as “cult-like” with religious ceremonies where incense
was burned to purify the workspace and lights were dimmed to deter
demons. Employees and later the Equal Employment Opportunity
Commission asserted that employees who resisted were disciplined or
terminated.

Employers use ‘captive audience’ meetings to support union-busting

Captive audience meetings have likewise become one of employers’
preferred union-busting tactics. Workers who express interest in
unionizing are routinely required by employers to hear one-sided
propaganda. Workers have no right to ask questions or hear opposing
viewpoints during these meetings. Analysis of National Labor Relations
Board (NLRB) elections documents
[[link removed]] shows that _89% of all
employers _conduct captive audience meetings in response to
unionization efforts. And the use of captive audience meetings caused
the average union election win rate to fall from 73% to 47%
[[link removed]].

Today, employers spend over $400 million per year
[[link removed]] on
“union-avoidance” consultants
[[link removed]],
who specialize in using captive audience meetings along with a host of
other tactics designed to intimidate and instill fear in workers for
the purpose of union-busting. Legislation giving workers the right to
opt out of captive audience meetings without fear of discipline or
termination is fundamental to restoring workers’ basic right to
organize without interference.

The unequal impact of coercive speech on workers

Legislation to protect workers from coercive speech is particularly
important for the workers most likely to encounter discrimination at
work.

Particularly vulnerable to such coercion are Black, brown, disabled
[[link removed]],
formerly incarcerated
[[link removed].],
LGBTQ
[[link removed]],
and other groups of workers who have historically faced discrimination
and unequal treatment in the labor market. Structural racism and
discrimination
[[link removed]]
in the form of systematically higher unemployment rates, higher job
search costs
[[link removed]],
lower wages, and greater tolerance for unfair treatment
[[link removed]],
put these workers in a disadvantaged position to resist employer
abuses.

Further, the United States’ piecemeal approach to holding employers
accountable for discrimination
[[link removed]]
often puts the onus of enforcement on workers, leaves many exposed to
retaliation, and excludes many of the most vulnerable workers
altogether. Given the precarity of employment for non-union workers in
the United States, there is a clear need for comprehensive and
enforceable worker protections from coercive speech.

Conclusion: State-level solutions to coercion

State lawmakers have the power to fight back against employer coercion
and address gaps in weak, outdated federal laws. States can legislate
to protect workers from unwanted speech, as affirmed by the Supreme
Court’s 1988 ruling Frisby v. Schultz
[[link removed]]. Many of the proposed
state-level laws also have the advantage of offering quicker
enforcement mechanisms than federal proceedings and include provisions
for “injunctive relief” (emergency court intervention to
immediately stop damaging employer behavior), restitution for lost
wages, reinstatement with retained benefits and seniority, and
coverage of attorney fees. As the national spotlight intensifies on
growing economic inequality
[[link removed]]
and decades-long erosion of workers’ rights, it is clear that
state-led initiatives could play a pivotal role in shaping the future
of worker rights in the U.S.

Legislators in all states should continue to build on existing
momentum to protect the freedom to avoid offensive or unwanted
political and religious speech at work. Lawmakers can enact
enforcement mechanisms to protect workers against financial harm and
retaliation if they opt out of such speech. This legislation will help
safeguard democracy by protecting citizens from undue influence over
their political views, donations, or votes; guaranteeing workers’
freedoms; and ensuring all workers can fully exercise their rights in
the workplace.

Enjoyed this post?
Sign up for EPI's newsletter so you never miss our research and
insights on ways to make the economy work better for everyone.

* workplace democracy
[[link removed]]
* Union RIghts
[[link removed]]
* workplace rights
[[link removed]]

*
[[link removed]]
*
[[link removed]]
*
*
[[link removed]]

 

 

 

INTERPRET THE WORLD AND CHANGE IT

 

 

Submit via web
[[link removed]]

Submit via email
Frequently asked questions
[[link removed]]

Manage subscription
[[link removed]]

Visit xxxxxx.org
[[link removed]]

Twitter [[link removed]]

Facebook [[link removed]]

 




[link removed]

To unsubscribe, click the following link:
[link removed]